After many years of professing my preference of Mobil 1 and Supertech filters, mainly on the valueand cost vs. performance, I have found a new combination that gives even better wear results. I still use the Supertech Oil filter. These are premium oil filters for the price. But I now am supporting Castrol Syntec Syntheteic Blend. I have 260,000 miles on an old Dodge, using MObil 1 exclusively. It recently started using the Syntec Blend in it after getting some oil consumption, and the oil consumption went away. I also started using it in my 2001 Dodoge Ram, 5.2L. it has 14,000 miles. The oil analysis came back and the wear numbers were nil, better that any Mobil1 analysis that I had ever done. I am now a believer that it isn't neccesarily the base oil that contributes to better wear performance, it's definetly the additive package. A group 2/3 combination is better for overall engine life. A group 4 is better for the extremes, but if you are an average driver such as me with my truck( drive to work/ occasional towing/ and around town/highway) I believe the grp.2/3 combination is a better choice for engine wear. The Castrol Syntec Blend is rated ACEA A1/A5, which means it has the additive package capable for an extended drain interval. This is the stuff. Give it a try. Good Bye!
A change of opinion and a dose of reality
- Thread starter Russ_Knize
- Start date
- Status
Do you do extended drains? If so, could you please post the UOA's of Castrol Syntec Blend in the UOA section?
5000 mile intervals, will post analysis soon.
If you were using the M1 10w30, it probably was just too thin. I have a 90 Nissan 240sx with 160K miles that has run on M1 all it's life, mostly 10w30 with a few tries with 20w50. It started to use oil with the 10w30, I switched to the M1 0w40 And so far it seems like consumption has gone away.
I think with M1 10w30 running on the very low end of a 30 weight , almost a 20, it's just too too thin for older cars. I've found in past 20w50 was too thick for good oil flow to the heads on this car, but the 0w40 seems to be a great "in between" between the 10w30 and the 20w50
I'm curious about weight M1 you were running and if you stuck with the same weight when you went to the blend. Also if you were using the SuperSyn variety of M1 or the older TriSyn. Obviously it was TriSyn on the Dodge in years past...
[ October 25, 2003, 08:07 PM: Message edited by: jsharp ]
[ October 25, 2003, 08:07 PM: Message edited by: jsharp ]
Patman
Staff member
Bob has been proving to us for a long time now that the additive package is more important than the base oil, at least in moderate drain intervals in normal temps.
In extremes, the synthetics will offer better protection though, and in longer drains.
Syntec blend isn't regarded as having all that great of an additive package in it though, so I'm surprised you're seeing such good results.
In extremes, the synthetics will offer better protection though, and in longer drains.
Syntec blend isn't regarded as having all that great of an additive package in it though, so I'm surprised you're seeing such good results.
One thing that I've noticed is that their is a good relationship between NOAK volatility and oil consumption. Viscosity is probably the case here, but I've noticed slightly better consumption with Amsoil, which have excellent low volatility numbers. My car actually used quite a bit of 0w-40, a lot of 0w-30 and moderate 5w-30. 10w-30 was the best in my car.
One thing to note though and that is certain oils just do better in certain engines. M1 has a very well balanced additive package IMO. Maybe not the best, but it's pretty **** good. The base oil is PAO bc of stability and long run drains.
[ October 25, 2003, 09:27 PM: Message edited by: buster ]
One thing to note though and that is certain oils just do better in certain engines. M1 has a very well balanced additive package IMO. Maybe not the best, but it's pretty **** good. The base oil is PAO bc of stability and long run drains.
[ October 25, 2003, 09:27 PM: Message edited by: buster ]
- Status
